their loss is your gain. fyi, less people = easier fight.
i mean, lets say 50 people with 150M GP, and 10 didnt join, so you will have 40 people with 125M active GP, lets say. you dont even realize how big of advantage this is. the matchmaking will probably place you against 50 people with 110-115M active GP. the big problem about this active GP, is only some of it is usable. so you have 40 people with better knowledge, better counter and MUCH better modding, against 50 people that cant even pass your traya walls. its so easy to win when you are missing players... if you are missing around 10 people, you will probably clear the whole map and win easily, to be honest. matchmaking really broken for that, their algorithm is pretty horrible. only 48-50 vs 48-50 fights feels like equal..
so, their problem. let them not enjoy the rewards... truth is - less people join, better for you. (ofc, minimum of 25) the matchmaking will give you huge advantage.
The headache I've had the most over TW is not being able to see who actually participated. For example, a player joins and doesn't set any defensive squads and plans to do the attack phase only. If the player then has no successful attacks, it appears that the player didn't participate due to only successful attacks being recorded. I would like to see a tab in the stats to show unsuccessful attacks by players and possibly also a kill/death or win/loss ratio for each player's battles. This would help guild leaders and officers better gauge the quality of a player's participation in my opinion. But back to the original topic, I think it would be a great addition to also see who didn't register at all for events. The way the raids' participant list looks would be an easy fix for that, maybe to include each player's active GP beside their name, instead of damage dealt, and a total of everyone's GP somewhere on the same page would be awesome.
Oh yeah! I used to make posts every single TW begging the devs for officer tools. But I've been ignored by @CG_SBCrumb and the other devs. Maybe they'll respond to you.
We aren't ignoring your request, it's on my giant list of community QOL suggestions. Unfortunately, this hasn't been a priority over other changes.
The headache I've had the most over TW is not being able to see who actually participated. For example, a player joins and doesn't set any defensive squads and plans to do the attack phase only. If the player then has no successful attacks, it appears that the player didn't participate due to only successful attacks being recorded. I would like to see a tab in the stats to show unsuccessful attacks by players and possibly also a kill/death or win/loss ratio for each player's battles. This would help guild leaders and officers better gauge the quality of a player's participation in my opinion. But back to the original topic, I think it would be a great addition to also see who didn't register at all for events. The way the raids' participant list looks would be an easy fix for that, maybe to include each player's active GP beside their name, instead of damage dealt, and a total of everyone's GP somewhere on the same page would be awesome.
This is a bit of an issue for our guild as well. I wish it would show those that participated on offense but didn't win and set any defense as "0" and those that did absolutely nothing as "--". I'd feel a lot more comfortable cracking down on slackers if I knew they did nothing, vs being "somewhat sure" they did nothing. (As we have a rule that all participants in TW must contribute, 3 strikes and you're out).
The headache I've had the most over TW is not being able to see who actually participated. For example, a player joins and doesn't set any defensive squads and plans to do the attack phase only. If the player then has no successful attacks, it appears that the player didn't participate due to only successful attacks being recorded. I would like to see a tab in the stats to show unsuccessful attacks by players and possibly also a kill/death or win/loss ratio for each player's battles. This would help guild leaders and officers better gauge the quality of a player's participation in my opinion. But back to the original topic, I think it would be a great addition to also see who didn't register at all for events. The way the raids' participant list looks would be an easy fix for that, maybe to include each player's active GP beside their name, instead of damage dealt, and a total of everyone's GP somewhere on the same page would be awesome.
You should mandate that everyone post at least one defensive team..... It's unfair to the rest of the guild, to be burdened with setting D so selfish Sam can do all attacks......
Also, if you have players doing all attack and still not posting banners because they keep losing, then they are costing you first time win banners.... They need a "talking to" as well.....
The headache I've had the most over TW is not being able to see who actually participated. For example, a player joins and doesn't set any defensive squads and plans to do the attack phase only. If the player then has no successful attacks, it appears that the player didn't participate due to only successful attacks being recorded. I would like to see a tab in the stats to show unsuccessful attacks by players and possibly also a kill/death or win/loss ratio for each player's battles. This would help guild leaders and officers better gauge the quality of a player's participation in my opinion. But back to the original topic, I think it would be a great addition to also see who didn't register at all for events. The way the raids' participant list looks would be an easy fix for that, maybe to include each player's active GP beside their name, instead of damage dealt, and a total of everyone's GP somewhere on the same page would be awesome.
You should mandate that everyone post at least one defensive team..... It's unfair to the rest of the guild, to be burdened with setting D so selfish Sam can do all attacks......
Also, if you have players doing all attack and still not posting banners because they keep losing, then they are costing you first time win banners.... They need a "talking to" as well.....
We have dedicated defensive players that don't like doing the attack phase or can't do much because of time zones or work and things like that and we also have dedicated attack players that only do the attack phase due to their extensive character collections and power squads. We tried doing the "post at least one defensive team" thing but its still a chore to see who signed up verses who posted D squads. I'm not saying we have players that don't post attack banners, that was just a hypothetical situation I was stating to make a point about being able to see more stats of the participating players.
Oh yeah! I used to make posts every single TW begging the devs for officer tools. But I've been ignored by @CG_SBCrumb and the other devs. Maybe they'll respond to you.
We aren't ignoring your request, it's on my giant list of community QOL suggestions. Unfortunately, this hasn't been a priority over other changes.
Well, here's to hoping "Other changes" means
hSTR top 10 reward change
STR1-6 reward increases
STR 1-6 time sink
STR not being fun in any way
really, the STR is only being done because CG made it that way #query-meatbag-is-this-really-good-for-the-game
Changing anything to do with TW will not make them any money. Now if they push out a cash grab toon to change your power in TW, now that they will change.
Not really. It is better to participate in TW with only 42 members but that all participate that enter with 50 members but only help 40. The problem only is with guilds with 60 M or 120 M GP.
It would be nice to see who joins and only does like 1 battle or sets one defense and then we can block them from joining a certain number of future Territory Wars. Right now we have 39 people who have joined the Territory War, but only about 6 people set defenses and no one has 4 of those 6 have started attacking.
Two things:
1) Players who earn 0 banners in a TW do no get rewards. So if a player doesn't set a defensive squad, and never successfully attacks, they will get nothing.
2) For a while, my guild tracked attacks through Rogue Actions. We would set up the attack zone as the "Prohibited" zone, and then each rogue action by a player would be an attack. Then I could reconcile "banners from attacking" and see how many wins each player had.
- I feel it's ridiculous that we had to do a creative workaround to track player activity, but that was our best idea.
Two things:
1) Players who earn 0 banners in a TW do no get rewards. So if a player doesn't set a defensive squad, and never successfully attacks, they will get nothing.
2) For a while, my guild tracked attacks through Rogue Actions. We would set up the attack zone as the "Prohibited" zone, and then each rogue action by a player would be an attack. Then I could reconcile "banners from attacking" and see how many wins each player had.
- I feel it's ridiculous that we had to do a creative workaround to track player activity, but that was our best idea.
Yes, but that player who.signed up elevated your active GP, which gets you a more difficult match up.....
Two things:
1) Players who earn 0 banners in a TW do no get rewards. So if a player doesn't set a defensive squad, and never successfully attacks, they will get nothing.
2) For a while, my guild tracked attacks through Rogue Actions. We would set up the attack zone as the "Prohibited" zone, and then each rogue action by a player would be an attack. Then I could reconcile "banners from attacking" and see how many wins each player had.
- I feel it's ridiculous that we had to do a creative workaround to track player activity, but that was our best idea.
Yes, but that player who.signed up elevated your active GP, which gets you a more difficult match up.....
Not necessarily. Need to go back to the Dev matchmaking clarification post.
What it means is that a player that signs up and does nothing could potentially cause the guild to place 2 more fleets and 8 more squads on defense (+1 for every 2 players), and have that many more squads/fleets to overcome on offense -- all while doing it shorthanded. Matchups aside, that is detrimental to winning a TW, and is not something that should be tolerated, especially for repeat offenders.
Two things:
1) Players who earn 0 banners in a TW do no get rewards. So if a player doesn't set a defensive squad, and never successfully attacks, they will get nothing.
2) For a while, my guild tracked attacks through Rogue Actions. We would set up the attack zone as the "Prohibited" zone, and then each rogue action by a player would be an attack. Then I could reconcile "banners from attacking" and see how many wins each player had.
- I feel it's ridiculous that we had to do a creative workaround to track player activity, but that was our best idea.
Yes, but that player who.signed up elevated your active GP, which gets you a more difficult match up.....
Depending on their roster, they will likely get your guild matched against a slightly tougher opponent, true. But, I was just pointing out that the member with 0 banner is hurting himself, because he won't even get the consolation prize.
I've lost count of the number of times I've had to reconcile the my guild roster on swgoh vs the TW signup or banner lists to see who has a 0. It is annoying, and seems easy enough to reconcile.
Modular coding allows coding for displaying participation to be the same for different events - coding to show non-participants in raids can also be used to show non-participants in TW.
The idea is independent of the coding environment and needs be done properly to avoid creating bugs
Can EA do it here? If it takes a long time to achieve, then the answer seems to be “no”
thats strange apology because the system is already implemented in game - just like the raids, people who didn't join it yet are shown in the end of the list with no status
IMO if the members didnt join that’s their problem as they miss out on rewards, though yea the guild might get downgraded a reward tier.
More annoying is having to go through 40+ names and do some matching so i can tell who is completely freeloading with 0 defense teams and no attacks whatsoever.
We can see who did nothing in TB, why cant it be the same for TW?
Edit: i’m not sure if signing up and posting zero nets u no rewards, can someone confirm?
IMO if the members didnt join that’s their problem as they miss out on rewards, though yea the guild might get downgraded a reward tier.
More annoying is having to go through 40+ names and do some matching so i can tell who is completely freeloading with 0 defense teams and no attacks whatsoever.
We can see who did nothing in TB, why cant it be the same for TW?
Edit: i’m not sure if signing up and posting zero nets u no rewards, can someone confirm?
Confirmed. We swept an entire guild once withn 30 min so alot of people "posted 0" b/c they didnt get a chance to attack. So they didnt get any rewards. Its why some posters above mentioned the place one defensive team. We also didnt know that posting 0 got you nothing at the time.
thats strange apology because the system is already implemented in game - just like the raids, people who didn't join it yet are shown in the end of the list with no status
Replies
i mean, lets say 50 people with 150M GP, and 10 didnt join, so you will have 40 people with 125M active GP, lets say. you dont even realize how big of advantage this is. the matchmaking will probably place you against 50 people with 110-115M active GP. the big problem about this active GP, is only some of it is usable. so you have 40 people with better knowledge, better counter and MUCH better modding, against 50 people that cant even pass your traya walls. its so easy to win when you are missing players... if you are missing around 10 people, you will probably clear the whole map and win easily, to be honest. matchmaking really broken for that, their algorithm is pretty horrible. only 48-50 vs 48-50 fights feels like equal..
so, their problem. let them not enjoy the rewards... truth is - less people join, better for you. (ofc, minimum of 25) the matchmaking will give you huge advantage.
You should be ashamed you didn't photoshop a helmet onto that guy
You have earned yourself a cookie right there.
Lol
This is a bit of an issue for our guild as well. I wish it would show those that participated on offense but didn't win and set any defense as "0" and those that did absolutely nothing as "--". I'd feel a lot more comfortable cracking down on slackers if I knew they did nothing, vs being "somewhat sure" they did nothing. (As we have a rule that all participants in TW must contribute, 3 strikes and you're out).
You should mandate that everyone post at least one defensive team..... It's unfair to the rest of the guild, to be burdened with setting D so selfish Sam can do all attacks......
Also, if you have players doing all attack and still not posting banners because they keep losing, then they are costing you first time win banners.... They need a "talking to" as well.....
We have dedicated defensive players that don't like doing the attack phase or can't do much because of time zones or work and things like that and we also have dedicated attack players that only do the attack phase due to their extensive character collections and power squads. We tried doing the "post at least one defensive team" thing but its still a chore to see who signed up verses who posted D squads. I'm not saying we have players that don't post attack banners, that was just a hypothetical situation I was stating to make a point about being able to see more stats of the participating players.
Well, here's to hoping "Other changes" means
We should have an option that was invented more recently than the mobile phone.
They’ll solve this issue by removing the rogue actions tab
1) Players who earn 0 banners in a TW do no get rewards. So if a player doesn't set a defensive squad, and never successfully attacks, they will get nothing.
2) For a while, my guild tracked attacks through Rogue Actions. We would set up the attack zone as the "Prohibited" zone, and then each rogue action by a player would be an attack. Then I could reconcile "banners from attacking" and see how many wins each player had.
- I feel it's ridiculous that we had to do a creative workaround to track player activity, but that was our best idea.
Yes, but that player who.signed up elevated your active GP, which gets you a more difficult match up.....
Not necessarily. Need to go back to the Dev matchmaking clarification post.
Depending on their roster, they will likely get your guild matched against a slightly tougher opponent, true. But, I was just pointing out that the member with 0 banner is hurting himself, because he won't even get the consolation prize.
I've lost count of the number of times I've had to reconcile the my guild roster on swgoh vs the TW signup or banner lists to see who has a 0. It is annoying, and seems easy enough to reconcile.
The idea is independent of the coding environment and needs be done properly to avoid creating bugs
Can EA do it here? If it takes a long time to achieve, then the answer seems to be “no”
That’s not true I’m afraid.
More annoying is having to go through 40+ names and do some matching so i can tell who is completely freeloading with 0 defense teams and no attacks whatsoever.
We can see who did nothing in TB, why cant it be the same for TW?
Edit: i’m not sure if signing up and posting zero nets u no rewards, can someone confirm?
Confirmed. We swept an entire guild once withn 30 min so alot of people "posted 0" b/c they didnt get a chance to attack. So they didnt get any rewards. Its why some posters above mentioned the place one defensive team. We also didnt know that posting 0 got you nothing at the time.
False
The entire point of this thread is that this is time consuming and annoying.